Item: Wrike
Rating: 8
Author: Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Wrike

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

We use Wrike primarily as a project management system almost exclusively for website projects. It allows us to more efficiently work through extensive website projects in a collaborative, efficient manner.

Pros and Cons

Pros

Wrike is incredibly user-friendly and intuitive, making it easy to learn and adopt.
It's tile function allows us to quickly pass jobs between stakeholders in the process, minimizing bottlenecks and downtime.
You can set up custom stages like Discovery, Design, Dev, QA, etc., so tasks flow like your actual process—not some generic template.

Cons

Can feel a little rigid out of the box – Setting up your ideal workflow takes time. The flexibility’s there, but you’ve got to dig for it.
Creative previews aren't always smooth – It handles basic proofing well, but don’t expect buttery-smooth playback for things like motion comps or interactive prototypes.
Notifications get noisy, fast – If you’re not careful with settings, Wrike will ping you for every little thing. Easy to get overwhelmed.

Return on Investment

Streamlined web projects = more time for creative work – By keeping timelines, tasks, and feedback all in one place, Wrike helps us spend less time managing the work and more time actually doing it.
Fewer dropped balls, smoother launches – With clear ownership and due dates, we’ve seen fewer last-minute scrambles and missed handoffs. That consistency pays off in client trust and internal sanity.
Better visibility = better prioritization – Wrike gives us a real-time view of what’s in motion, what’s stuck, and what’s coming up—so we can make smarter calls about where to focus our energy.

AI and Automation

We have not used any of these features, at least not in my experience.

Usability

This rating might be a little unfair given my limited scope in terms of usage, but while quick to learn, it still does have some room for improvement.

Alternatives Considered

Figma and Workamajig

Figma is similar in many regards from the ways I've used it. Wrike is far superior to Workamajig in terms of visual language and ease of use; however, Workamajig seems to be more robust for the expansive needs of an agency.

Key Insights

Do you think Wrike delivers good value for the price?

Not sure

Are you happy with Wrike's feature set?

Yes

Did Wrike live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Wrike go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Wrike again?

Yes

Likelihood to Recommend

Wrike shines when you’ve got a multi-stage web project with lots of dependencies—like redesigning a full site with content, UX, dev, and client approvals all moving in tandem. It’s great for keeping cross-functional teams aligned and making sure nothing slips. It also works well when you're juggling several client sites at once and need a clean way to track timelines and resources. Where it struggles a bit is with fast-turn creative work or super collaborative concepting—things that are messy by nature. If you're riffing live in Figma or bouncing ideas back and forth quickly, Wrike can feel a little… heavy.

Wrike Feature Ratings

Comments

Please log in to join the conversation

User-friendly and visually appealing